
t0 D^LIi^clary 

<9U^3 V>c»vr>a 




^^<' 



V >v 




BookJ3alU^ 



59th Congress, ) HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, j Report 

1st Session. ) { No. 1186. 



MARKING BOUNDARY LINES BETWEEN TEXAS AND NEW 
MEXICO AND OKLAHOMA. 



Febetjaey 13, 1906. — Committed to the Committee of the Whole.House on the state 
of the Union and ordered to be printed. 



U.5, 0^v^ye.s 

Mr. BiRDSALL, from the Committee on the Judiciary, submitted the 

following 

EEPORT. 

[To accompany H. K. 443.] 

The Committee on the Judiciarj^, to whom was referred the bill 
(H. R. 4-13) providing for the marking of the boundary lines between 
the State of Texas and the Territories of New Mexico and Oklahoma, 
submit the following report: 

In the year 1835 the Republic of Texas declared its independence 
from Mexico. By a joint resolution passed March 1, 1845, Congress 
consented that "The territory properly included within and rightfully 
belonging to the Republic of Texas'" might be created into a State to 
be admitted into the Union, one of the conditions of such consent being 
that the new State be formed subject to the adjustment by tlie United 
States of all questions of boundary that might arise with other govern- 
ments. (5 Stat., 797.) 

The conditions prescribed were accepted by Texas (1 Sayle's Early 
Laws of Texas, art. 1531), and by the joint resolution of Congress 
approved December 29, 1845, Texas was admitted into the Union on 
an equal footing in all respects with the original States (9 Stat., 108). 
Then came the act of Congress of September 9, 1850 (C. 49, 9 Stat., 
446), entitled "An act proposing to the State of Texas the establishment 
of her northern and western boundaries and the relinquishment of all 
claim to territory exterior to said boundaries and to establish a Terri- 
tory for New Mexico." 

The act referred to defined the northern boundary of Texas in the 
following language: 

The State of Texas will agree that her boundary on the north shall commence at 
the point at which the meridian of one Imndred degrees west from Greenwich is 
intersected by the parallel of thirty-six degrees thirty minutes north latitude, and 
shall run from said point due west to the meridian of one hundred and three degrees 
west from Greenwich, thence her boundary shall run due south to the thirty-sjcund 
degree of north latitude, thence on the said parallel of thirty-two degrees of north 
latitude to the Rio Bravo del Norte, and theuce with the channel of said river to the 
Gulf of Mexico. 



31 t^i-s 

2 TEXAS, NEW MEXICO, AND OKLAHOMA BOUNDARY LINES. 

By the same act the State of Texas, in consideration of 110,000,000, 
was to cede to the United States all her claim to territory' exterior of 
the limits and boundaries which she agreed to establish b}^ the fore- 
going article. 

Texas accepted the act November 25, 1850. (2 Sayle's P^arlj^ Laws. 
of Texas, art. 2127.) 

June 5, 1858, Congress passed an act to authorize the President of 
the United States, in conjunction with the State of Texas, to run and 
mark the boundary lines between the United States and the State of 
Texas. The act provided for the appointment of a suitable person or 
persons on the part of the United States to act with similar persons 
on the part of Texas in running and marking the lines. The act itself 
describes the boundaries to be run by such persons as follows: 

Beginning at a point where the one hundredth degree of longitude west from Green- 
wich crosses the Bed River and running thence north to the point where said one hun- 
dredth degree of longitude intersects the parallel of thirty-six degrees thirty minutes 
north latitude, and thence west with the said parallel of thirty-six degrees and thirty 
minutesnorth latitude to the point where it intersects the one hundred and third degree 
of longitude west from Greenwich, and thence south with said one hundred and third 
degree of longitude to the thirty-second parallel of north latitude, and thence west 
with the said thirty-second degree of north latitude to the Eio Grande. (11 Stat., 310. ) 

The survey thus provided for was in part executed in the years 1859 
and 1860. John H. Clark was appointed commissioner by the United 
States under the act of June 5, 1858, and, in conjunction with one 
William R. Scurry, commissioner on behalf of the State of Texas, 
commenced a survey of the northwestern boundary in January, 1859. 

The commissioner on behalf of the State of Texas, on account of a 
quarrel, abandoned the work in May, 1859. The line was surveyed 
and niarked by mounds from the vicinity of El Paso eastward on the 
thirty-second parallel to the one hundred and third meridian, and north 
on the one hundred and third meridian for about 20 or 21 miles. The 
longitude of the monument at the intersection of the thirty-second 
parallel and the one hundred and third meridian rests upon the station 
Frontero of the Mexican boundary survey, a well-established point, 
carried eastward from the Rio Grande 211 miles by chaining and 
proper triangulation. 

The northwest corner of Texas was established in September, 1859, 
by Clark, who then surveyed and monumented the one hundred and 
third meridian from the northwest corner of Texas southward for 156 
miles, leaving a gap of 130 miles between the south end of the line 
thus survej^ed and the north end of the line surveyed by him in May 
the same year. It would appear that Clark afterwards projected his 
survey from the north farther south about 70 miles, but it was not 
monumented, so that in fact about 116 miles remain unmarked and 
about 60 miles have never been surveyed at all. 

In the year 1860 he returned to the work and began his survey on 
the one hundredth meridian where it crosses the Canadian River. 
Indian contract surveyors named Jones and Brown surveyed most of 
the boundary on the one hundredth meridian in 1859. 

Clark accepted the survey previously made by Jones and Brown of 
the one hundreth meridian from the main Red River northward to a 
point 19 miles north of the Canadian, continued that line northward 
to a point of intersection with the parallel of 36° 30', the northeast 
corner of the Texas Panhandle, and surveyed and marked the northern 



joO 



TEXAS, NEW MEXICO, AND OKLAHOMA BOUNDARY LINES. 3 

boundaiy of the Panhandle. This ended his efforts toward complet- 
ing the survey provided for by the act of June 5, 1858. 
\ The result of his work remained unreported to Congress until 1882, 
'^^'V^heu it was called for by the Senate of the Forty-seventh Congress, 
- and a report was made, as appears by Senate Document No. 70, first ses- 
- sion Forty-seventh Congress. Up to the date of this report no part 
'^-. of said boundary had ever been officially agreed upon or accepted by 
Co Texas or the United States, as contemplated in the act of June 5, 1858, 
authorizing the surve3% Since that date part at least of the Clark 
survey has been adopted by the United States. In the act approved 
March 3, 1891, known as the sundry civil act, it is enacted — 

That the boundary Ime between said public land strip and Texas and between 
Texas and New Mexico, established under the act of June 5, 1858, is hereby confirmed. 
(26 Stat., p. 97L) 

By this act the Clark survey as to the one hundred and third 
meridian is confirmed. Clark erected 26 monuments on this one hun- 
dred and third meridian, 3 of which are on the south end and 23 on 
the north end. In his report (see Doc. No. TO, 47th Cong.) he describes 
them as chiefly earth or stone monuments, sometimes erected aroimd 
a stake. Subsequent survej^s made by contract surveyors of the 
United States and bv surveyors for the State of Texas have demonstrated 
that few, probably not more than 3 or 4, of the monuments located bv 
Clark upon the one hundred and third meridian can now be found 
and identified. The Department of the Interior caused to be pub- 
lished in 1902 Bulletin of the United States Geological Survey No. 
191, series F, Geography 30, on the Northwestern Boundary of Texas, 
by IMarcus Baker, in which the several surveys of the boundary line 
are reviewed, and so far as relates to the boundary line on the one 
hundred and third meridian the following conclusions are arrived at 
by Mr. Baker: 

(1) The western boundary of the Panhandle of Texas is fixed by law 
on the one hundred and third meridian. 

(2) Of the 310 miles composing the line, 24 miles at the south end 
and 156 miles at the north end were surveyed and marked with monu- 
ments by Clark in 1859. 

(3) Clark's survey has been confirmed by the United States, 

(6) Of the monuments south of the Canadian we have no informa- 
tion. It seems probable that many or most of them are lost. 

(7) The boundary along the 131 miles not surve3"ed or marked by 
Clark is on the one hundred and third meridian as it shall hereafter be 
surveyed and confirmed. 

(8) As to the 24 miles at the south end we have no information to 
show that it is not on the true one hundred and third meridian. 

(9) As to that part of the Clark line running south from the Cana- 
dian RiA^-er about 80 miles, we have no information as to its longitude 
except the monuments on the banks of the Canadian. 

With relation to the boundary on the one hundredth meridian we 
glean from the report of Marcus Baker, No. 194, the following 
discussion: 

The east boundary of the Panhandle of Texas is established I)}" law 
to be that part of the one hundredth meridian of west longitude from 
Greenwich included between Red River and the parallel of 36^ 30'. 
In 1850 Texas agreed that the northeast corner of the Panhandle 



4 TEXAS, NEW MEXICO, AND OKLAHOMA BOUNDARY LINES. 

should be at the intersection of the parallel of 36^ 30' and the one 
hundredth meridian west of Greenwich. In 1859 the line was sur- 
veyed and marked upon the ground. A. H, Jones and H. M. C. Brown 
were contract survej^ors employed by the Indian Office prior to the 
civil war to survey the boundary' of certain Indian lands. 

In Nov^ember, 1857, Daniel G. Major was appointed astronomer for 
the Indian boundary surveys. In the spring of 1859 Jones and Brown 
started from a monument on the north branch of Red River and which, 
according to observations made bv Major in January, February, and 
March, 1859, is on the one hundredth meridian of west longitude from 
Greenwich. From this point they surveyed north, setting monuments 
at every mile. The entire distance from Red River to the northeast 
corner of the Panhandle is 133 miles. Starting at the south end, Jones 
and Brown surveyed and marked about 110 miles, their terminating 
monument being set about 19 miles north of the Canadian River. The 
remaining 23 miles were surveyed by Clark in Jmie of the following 
year. 

Clark commenced his survey at the point where the line of Jones 
and Brown crossed the Canadian River, followed their line northward 
19 miles to its end, and then proloiiged it 23 miles from there to its 
intersection with the parallel of 36-" 30', the northeast corner of the 
Panhandle, which he marked by a monument. As a check on the 
longitude of the northeast corner it appeared by Clark's report that 
he prolonged the ffones and Brown line 30 miles farther north to the 
south boimdar}^ of Kansas, where he intersected that line about 1,700 
feet east of the one hundredth meridian as determined by himself 
when emplo3^ed by a surve3"ing party in 1857. 

Since the original surveys of this line all the lands adjoining it on 
the east have been surveyed and subdivided. 

In June, 1892, Professor Pritchett was emplo3'ed by the State of 
Texas to determine as accurately as possible the longitude of the mon- 
ument on the north bank of the Red River set in 1859 to mark the 
one hundredth meridian. This he did, and found its longitude to be 
100" 0' 45". 71 west of Greenwich', or 3,797.3 feet west of the one hun- 
dredth meridian. Subsequent steps have been taken by Congress to 
determine definitely the true location of the one hundredth meridian, 
to which further attention will be called. 

The conclusions drawn by Marcus Baker in Bulletin No. 191 regard- 
ing this portion of the boundary are thus set forth: 

(1) The northeast corner of the Panhandle of Texas is fixed by law 
at the intersection of the parallel of 36° 30' and the one hundredth 
meridian west of Greenwich. 

(2) This point was located by Clark in 1860, and a monument was 
erected to mark it. 

(3) Congress confirmed a part of Clark's survey in 1891, such con- 
firmation including his monument at the northeast corner of Texas. 

(1) Subsequent surveys, though inconclusive, make it probable that 
the said Clark monument was established a little to the west — sa}^ 1,000 
feet, more or less — of the one hundredth meridian. 

(5) The monument on the north bank of the Red River, set by 
Major in 1859 to mark the eastern boundary of Texas at that point, 
is 3,797 feet west of the one hundredth meridian. 

(6) By subsequent surveys of public lands by the Land Department 
said monument on the Red River has l^een accepted as marking the 
Texas boundary line at that point. 



TEXAS, NEW MEXICO, AND OKLAHOMA BOUNDARY LINES. 5 

(7) Those boundary monuments which are northward from this one 
and which were set by Jones and Brown in 1859 have been accepted in 
the public sui'vey as boundary monuments of Texas. 

(10) Texas has never accepted or disputed these monuments as far as 
known. 

The foregoing^ appears to have been the condition of this boundary 
question up to January, 1901, when Congress, by an act approved 
Januar}' 15, 1901 (31 Stat. L. , 731), provided for the determination of the 
true location of the one hundredth degree of west longitude as follows: 

That the Secretary of the Interior be, and he is hereby, authorized and directed to 
cause to be established and fixed the intersection of the true one hundredtli merid- 
ian with Ked River by the most accurate and s(;ientific methods, and at said intersec- 
tion cause a suitable monument to be erected on the ground. 

In pursuance of this act, Mr. Arthur D. Kidder, examiner of sur- 
veys, was detailed to make the necessary observations and calculations 
and to establish the point of intersection of the true one hundredth 
meridian with the Red River. 

Mr. Kidder performed the work in the months of February, March, 
and April, 190;^, and the result of his labor was reported to the second 
session of the Fift}' -seventh Congress by the Secretary of the Interior, 
and is found in House Document No. 375. 

Mr. Kidder determined that the correct longitude of the old initial 
monument on the Red River was 100'-' 0' 24" and that the true one hun- 
dredth meridian was 3,699.7 feet east of the initial monument. He set 
a monument at the point of true determination. 

The act in question was passed in Congress in consequence of a deci- 
sion of the Supreme Court of the United States in the Greer County 
case reported in 162 U. S., 1-89, 90, and the necessity and purposes of 
its enactment are recited in the preamble as follows: 

Whereas there was a controversy of long standing between the United States and 
the State of Texas as to the ownership of the territory formerly known as Greer 
County, Texas, which was finally determined in favor of the United States by the 
decree of the Supreme Court of the United States March sixteenth, eighteen hundred 
and ninety-six, in a suit in equity brought in the United States against the State of 
Texas in that court; and 

Whereas the treaty between the United States and Spain, which was ratified Feb- 
ruary nineteenth, eijihteen hundred and twenty-one, fixed the boundary between the 
United States and Spain, and this became the boundary between the United States 
and Spain, and this became the boundary between the United States and the Republic 
of Texas and the State of Texas successively; and 

Whereas it was provided by said treaty that the boundary line west of thje Missis- 
sippi should begin on the Gulf of Mexico at the mouth of the Sabine River in the 
sea, continuing north along the western bank of that river to the tliirty-second degree 
of latitude, thence by a line due north to the degree of latitude where it strikes the 
Rio Roxo of Natchitoches or Red River, then lollowing the course of the Rio Roxo 
westward to the degree of longitude one hundred west from London and twenty- 
three from Washington, then Grossing the said Red River and running thence by a line 
due north to the river Arkansas aiul so forth; and 

Whereas the Supreme Court of the United States in said cause adjudged that the 
words in said treaty "then following the course of the Rio Roxo westward to the 
degree of longitude one hundred west from London and twenty-three from Wash- 
ington, then cro.'^ing the said river" referred to the true one hundredth meri<Han 
astronomically lottated; and 

Whereas the true intersection of said one hundredth meridian with Red River, or 
what, prior to'said decision was known sometimes as the South Fork of Red River or 
Prairis Dog Town Fork, has never been fixed by the United States and the State of 
Texas, acting together and in the manner provided by said treaty, nor was said true 
intersection fixed by the decree in said cause: Therefore, 

Be it enacted, etc., That the Secretary of the Interior be, and he is hereby, author- 
ized and directed to cause to l)e established and fixed the intersection of the true 
one hundredth meridiam with Re<l River, or what prior to said decision was known 



6 TEXAS, NEW MEXICO, AND OKLAPIOMA BOUNDARY LINES. 

sometimes as the South Fork of tlie Red Rivei' or Prairie Dog Town F')rk, by the 
most accurate and scientitic methods, and at said intersection cause a suital:)le monu- 
ment to be erected on the ground. 

The general report of Artliur D. Kidder, special examiner of sur- 
veys on the boundaries of Texas, Oklahoma, and New Mexico, made 
to the Secretar}^ of the Interior, sets forth the following facts, throw- 
ing light upon the situation to a considerable extent: 

GENERAL RSPOHT. 

It is the intention in this portion of my report to show as far as 
possible the existing conditions along the boundary lines between the 
State of Texas and the Territories of New Mexico and Oklahoma 
considered in their entirety from the initial monument on the old 
one-hundredth meridian on the Red River, thence on the locus of the 
serveys as executed on the one-hundredth meridian, the parallel of 
36° 30' north latitude, the one hundred and -third meridian, and the 
thirty-second parallel to the bed of the Rio Grande as occupied by 
the river in 1858. The conditions stated in the goregoing held notes 
are conditions of fact ratiier than theory, and I shall endeavor to 
exj^lain them more comprehensive!}^ herewith than is possible in the 
elaborate observations, calculations, and field notes upon which my 
conclusions are based, and I shall endeavor to show as far as possible 
the significance with which all existing monuments are held, not only 
by the United States, but also by Texas and all settlers Avhose land 
titles depend upon them. 

For a history' of the Clark surveys reference is had in Senate 
Executive Document No. TO, Forty-seventh Congress, first session; 
for an exhaustive history and study of the records in Washington 
pertaining to the Clark and subsequent surveys of the boundary 
lines in question reference is had in House Document No. 035, Fifty- 
seventh Congress, first session; for the observations, calculations, and 
field notes of the establishment of the point of intersection of the true 
one hundredth meridian with the Red River reference is had in 
House Document No. 375, Fifty-seventh Congress, second session. 

The work described in the foregoing field notes was executed under 
instructions from the honorable Commissioner of the General Land 
Office dated March 12, 1903, said instructions anticipating the fol- 
lowing iield work : 

(a) The execution of the necessary astronomical observations and 
calculations and the projection of such true lines as would enable the 
establishment by the most approved methods and the marking upon 
the ground the following astronomical points, viz : 

(1) The point of intersection of the one hundredth meridian Avest 
from Greenwich with the parallel of 36° 30' north latitude. 

(2) The point of intersection of the one hundred and third 
meridian west from Greenwich with the parallel of 36° 30' north 
latitude. 

(3) The point of intersection of the one hundred and third 
meridian west from Greenwich Avith the parallel of 32° north 
latitude. 

(4) The point of intersection of the thirty-second parallel novlh 
latitude with the Rio Grande. 



TEXAS, NEW MEXICO, AND OKLAHOMA BOUNDARY LINES. ( 

(h) In connection with the above the execution of the necessary 
retracements, in order to ascertain the relative location of existing 
old monuments to the true astronomical lines upon which they were 
designated to be established, noting to some extent the absence of 
monuments now lost or obliterated. 

{c) The execution of a careful retracement of the one hundredth 
meridian, as closed upon in the survey of public lands in Oklahoma, 
from the Ked River north to the parallel of 36° 30' north latitude. 

(a, h, c) The consummation of the work under the above instruc- 
tions, including, therefor, the establishment of the above standard 
f>oints, the ascei'tainment of the condition of the old boundary lines as 
now existing, the amount of error in the original surveys, and the 
magnitude of the changes which a true determination Avill involve, 
all as a basis for further recommendation to the Department for the 
resurvey or remarking of the boundaries in question. 

I liaA^e the honor to report as follows : 

(a) The reference point chosen for the longitude determinations 
was the point used for the Eed River observatory in my determina- 
tion in 1902 of the point of intersection of the true one hundredth 
meridian with the Red River, pursuant to the provisions of the act 
of Congress approved January 15, 1901, (U. S. Stat. L., 31, p. 731). 
The longitude of the Red River observatory was determined by tele- 
graphic exchange of time signals from the observatory of the Wash- 
ington University, at St. Louis, ]Mo. The check in the position of 
the Red River observatory pier is found in the comparison of the fixa- 
tion of the i^oint of intersection of the true one hundredth meridian 
Avith the Red River as thus determined and fixed, with a similar fixa- 
tion in 1892 by Prof. H. S. Fritchett. Professor Pritchett observed 
at Childress, Tex., and also determined his position by telegraphic ex- 
change of time signals from the Washington University observatory. 
From the point thus determined at Childress Professor Pritchett 
established a triangular system by which the longitude was trans- 
ferred to the Red River, and the true one hundredth meridian fixed, 
but not marked, at a point 3.797.3 feet east of the initial monument 
of the old one hundredth meridian. (See H. Doc. No. 635, 57th 
Cong.. 1st sess., pp. 31-35 inch This report states that Professor 
Pritchett was employed by the State of Texas.) 

In 1902 the true one-hundredth meridian was fixed and marked at 
a point 3,699.7 feet east of the initial monument of the old one- 
hundredth meridian. (See H. Doc. No. 375, 57th Cong., 2d sess., 
Avhich pertains entirely to the determination in 1902.) The differ- 
ence in the two fixations is thus 97.6 feet, corresponding to 0° 0' 1.17" 
in longitude. Considering that the transfers of the longitude from 
the respective observatories were both correct and the errors in trans- 
fer Avere probably not to exceed one-tenth of the difference in the 
fixation, the resulting difference is that due to the observations for 
time and exchange of time signals. The latter difference corre- 
sponds to a little less than 0.08 of a second of time. Tire difference 
is a A'ery reasonable one, and it is presumed that all interested 
parties will readily acquiesce in the determination of the true one- 
hundredth meridian as authorized by Congi^ess. 

The observatory at St. Louis, having been removed, was unavail- 
able for the execution of the longitude determinations in 1903, and 



8 TEXAS^ NEW MEXICO, AND OKLAHOMA BOUNDARY LINES. 

the determinations in 1903 were therefore made by reference to the 
Ked River observatory pier, and the new determinations therefore 
refer by two steps to the old Washington University observatory, 
for which the observers for both steps were the same and the methods 
practically the same, with a slight advantage in thoroughness and a 
larger number of stars observed in the determinations in 1903. The 
telegraphic exchange of time signals for the work under the present 
instructions was very much facilitated by the availability of the 
telegraphic circuits. The circuits were the shortest possible ones 
and worked perfectly, aided also, as they were, b}^ the new General 
Land OfFice telegraph instruments. 

The most approved methods were pursued in the longitude deter- 
minations and a fair check upon the results accomplished is found in 
the position of the longitude pier at Higgins, Tex., as determined 
astronomically and as determined by the retra cement of the old one 
hundredth meridian by transit line. This difference corresponds to 
less than 0.02 of a second of time, being 0."22 of longitude, measur- 
ing 18 feet, and is certainly well within a reasonable limit of error. 

The observations for latitude were made in the immediate vicinity 
of the point whose positions were to be fixed, the approved Talcott 
method was pursued and only standard stars were used, the positions 
being taken from the American Ephemeris or Berliner Jahrbuch 
for 1903. The zenith telescope performed nicely and the mean result 
of all observations by Mr. SlacConnel and myself was used in the 
final fixations. It is not desirable to expand here upon what is 
already described in detail in the field notes of the astronomical 
work, but in concluding ui:)on the precision attained I only w^ish to 
state that every effort was made to arrive at the most accurate and 
reliable results. 

The following astronomical points were fixed: (1) 36° 30' north 
latitude-100° west longitude; (2) 36° 30' north latitude-103° west 
longitude; (3) 32° north latitude-103° west longitude ; (4) 32° north 
latitude near its intersection with the Rio Grande. 

Each point was marked in a thorough and workmanlike manner 
by a monument built with concrete, cubic contents a little over 1 
cubic j^ard and weighing therefore about 3,500 pounds each. The 
portion above ground is enveloped in a shell of heavy galvanized 
iron which carries the letters appropriate to the point. 

The above therefore includes all that was outlined in what I have 
termed part {a) of the instructions. 

(6, c) THE ONE HUNDREDTH MERIDIAN HISTORICAL SKETCH. 

(See Field Notes of Surveys of Indian Reservations in Indian Territory, vol. 2, 

p. 2n.) 

The Jones and Brown surrey. — Under contract with the Commis- 
sioner of Indian Affairs dated October 13, 1857, A. H. Jones and 
H. M. C. Brown, United States surveyors, surveyed, in 1859, the 
the west boundary of the Choctaw and Chickasaw countries. This 
boundary line was designated as the one hundredth meridian of 
longitude west from Greenwich. The longitude of the initial point 
on the Red River was determined b}^ moon culminations and the 
one hundredth meridian fixed by the astronomer, Daniel G. Major. 



TEXAS; KEW MEXICO; AND OKLAHOMA BOUNDARY LINES. 9 

The line was surveyed 90 miles to the north bank of the Canadian 
and continued thence as the west boundary of the Creek or Seminole 
country, a distance of 19 miles 56.54 chains, to an intersection with 
the south boundary of the Cherokee country, a distance, therefore, of 
100 miles 56.54 chains from the Red River. 

jMoiunnents were established bj' Jones and Brown at interavls of 1 
mile; they each consisted of a wooden post witnessed by pits and a 
mound of earth; topographical points of interest were noted, and 
bearing- trees were marked whenever available. (See S. Ex. Doc. 
No. TO, 4Tth Cong., 1st sess.) 

The Clark surrey. — Under the provisions of the act approved 
June 5, 1858 (U. S. Stat. L., 11, p. 310), John H. Clark was appointed 
United States commissioner for the survey of the one hundredth me- 
ridian, as follows : " Beginning at the point where the one hundredth 
degree of longitude west from Greenwich crosses Red River, and run- 
ning thence north to the point where said one liundredth degree of 
longitude intersects the parallel of thirty-six degress thirty minutes, 
north latitude.'' This survey Clark executed in 1860, his operations 
being best described in his own words. (See p. 300 of above Doc. 
No. 70.) 

That part of the one hundredth meridian lying between the main branch of 
Red River and the southern boundary of the Cherolcee country had been deter- 
mined, run. and marlved by Messrs. Jones and Brown in 1859 under the direction 
of the Indian Bureau, as constituting the boundary line between Texas and a 
part of the Indian Territory. So much of the boundary line as was then 
estal)lished Hon. .Jacob Thompson, then Secretary of the Interior, directed me 
adoi>t, and in pursuance of this instruction I simply retraced the meridian up 
to v.iiere the worlv of INIessrs. Jones and Brown ended. Thence I prolonged it 
up to its intersection with the parallel 36° 30'. 

The following is Clark's description of the monuments on the one 
hundredth meridian : 

1. On the north banli of Pond Creek. It is built of firm soil and the stake in 
the center is a large bai-ked cottonwood tree. 

2. Is on a trail made by JNIajor Sedgwick and his command in 1860, very near 
the north bank of Middle River. The soil is just here somewhat sandy, but not 
light enough to drift. 

3. On Commission Creelv, built of stone. 

Southward from this last monument, beginning at the southern boundary line 
of tlie Cherokee country, mounds of earth are thrown up for every mile to the 
main branch of Red River. In retracing this part of the boundary line I found 
that some of these monuments, falling in hollows, had been washed away and 
many destroyed by buffalo. (See vol. 82, Field Notes, Indian Territory.) 

The Du Bow reestablishment. — Under contract dated June 6, 1873, 
Mr. C. L. Du Bois, United States surveyor, reestablished, in 1875, the 
one hundredth meridian from the Red River north, a distance of 31 
miles. 

]\Ir. Du Bois developed the fact that the line surveyed by Messrs. 
Jones and Brown had a large bearing to the east, averaging in the 
31 miles about N. 0° 40' E. The identification of the Jones and 
Brown line by Mr. Du Bois was positive, however, and his reestab- 
lishment consi.sted in the rebuildiflg with stone of the mile corners in 
the exact location as established bv Messrs. Jones and Brown. (See 
vols. 71, 73, 74, 75, 76, 81, 82, and iOl, Field Notes, and vol. 14, Plats, 
Indian Territory.) 

The Du Bois closings. — Under the same contract as above Mr. Du 
'Bois in the same j'ear subdivided the public lands in Tps. 1 to 6 N., 



10 TEXAS, NEW MEXICO;, AND OKLAHOMA BOUNDARY LINES. 

iriclusiA'e, R. 27 W., Indian meridian, Oklahoma, and in the execution 
of that snrvey closed his lines upon the one hundredth meridian as 
reestablished by himself, setting closing corners thereon. (See vol. 
101 and lOo, Field Notes, and vol. 14, Plats, Indian Territory.) 

The Morr'dl closings. — Under contract dated June 2G, 1873, O. T. 
Morrill, United States surveyor, surveyed the public lands in Tps. 7 
to 12 N., inclusive, R. 27 W., Indian meridian. Oklahoma, and in the 
execution of this survey closed his lines upon the one hundredth 
meridian as surveyed by Jones and Brown, identified by himself but 
not reestablished. Mr. ]\Iorrill erected closing corners where his lines 
intersected the one hundredth meridian as surveyed by Jones and 
Brown. (See vol. 89, Field Notes, Indian Territory.) 

The Tlackhusch reestahlishment. — Under contract dated June 23, 
1873, H. C F. Hackbusch, United States surveyor, reestablished, in 
1875, the one hundredth meridian from the sixty-seventh to the 
ninetieth milepost. 

Mr. Hackbusch states: " The original corners on the one hundredth 
meridian, the boundary line between Texas and the Indian Territory, 
owing principally to the sandy soil, are so far obliterated and indis- 
tinct that I find it necessary to resurvey and reestablish the corners of 
said line as far as my contract extends, so as to enable me ^ close the 
line of my survey thereon." Mr. Hackbusch states that he identified 
the Avitness corner 9 chains south of the true point for the eighty- 
ninth mile corner and that he identified the sixty-seventh mile corner. 
It is not clear from his notes how many or what other intermediate 
mile corners were identified, but it is evident that a number of others 
were identified. He states that the reestahlishment and resurvey were 
run " after adjusting my solar compass so as to retrace the original 
line." 

Mr. Hackbusch made his reestahlishment at ever}^ mile point by set- 
ting a post properly marked and witnessed by depositing a charred 
stake, digging pits, and erecting a mound ot earth. Three cotton- 
wood bearing trees were also noted and marked by him to witness the 
point 80 miles and 60 chains on the Washita River. (See vol. 89, 
Field Notes, and vol. 14 Plats, Indian Territory.) 

The Hackhuseh closings. — Under the same contract as above, Mr. 
Hackbusch in the same year subdivided the public lands in Tps. 13 to 
15 N., inclusive, and fraction T. 16 N., R. 26 W., Indian meridian, 
Oklahoma, and in the execution of that survey closed his lines upon 
the one hundredth meridian as reestablished by himself, setting 
closing corners thereon. (See vol. 57, Field Notes, Indian Territory.) 

The Darlhg resurvey. — Under contract dated September 7, 1872, 
Ehud N. Darling, United States surveyor, resurvey ed in 1875 the 
one hundredth meridian from the ninetieth mile corner on the north 
bank of the Canadian north to the south boundary of Kansas, le- 
surveying the line as the west bou.ndary of the Cherokee countr3^ 

Mr. Darling identified the following partly obliterated cornei's: 
(1) The ninetieth mile corner, his initial point; (2) the second mile 
corner; (3) the third mile comer,* and (4) the fourth mile comer, 
which he describes thus : 

At this corner found part of a post, the most of it had been burned, no signs 
of a mound. This was the last sign of a corner found on the line. 



TEXAS, NEW MEXICO, AND OKLAHOMA BOUNDARY LINES. 11 

Mr. Darling set a stone, suitabl}^ marked, at every mile point of 
his resiirvey of the one hundredth meridian. (See vol. 59, 60, and 
61, Field Notes, and vol, 14 Plats, Indian Territory.) 

The Darling closings. — Under the same contract as above, Mr. 
Darlino-, in the same year, subdivided the public lands in fractional 
T. 16 N. and Tps. 17 to 23 N., inclusive, K. 26 AV., Indian meridian, 
Oklahoma, and in the execution of that survey closed his lines upon 
the one hundredth meridian as resurveyed by himself, setting closing 
corners thereon. 

THE OLD ONE HUNDREDTH INIERIDIAN TO-DAT. 
(See foregoing field notes.) 

The J 903 retracement. — Under instructions dated March 12, 1903, 
I retraced the above-described one hundredth meridian from the 
Red River to Darling's forty-fourth mile corner, a distance of 134 
miles from the Red River, or to a point a little over 1^ mile north of 
the parallel 36° 30'. INIy operations and results obtained are fully 
described in the foregoing field notes of my retracement, and at the 
conclusion of said notes I have arranged a table shoAving the distance 
from every identified mile corner on the old one hundredth meridian 
to the true one hundredth meridian, as determined astronomically 
in 1902 and 1903. 

My field notes show that the present identification of the old line 
from the Red River to the thirty-first mile corner as reestablished in 
1875 by Mr. Du Bois is positive and conclusive. 

Starting at the Red River the old meander corner was found to 
have been washed away, as the river has cut about a chain north 
since 1875. 

The initial monument was identified and stands 56.06 chains west 
of the true one hundredth meridian, as marked bv the monument 
established in 1902. 

Northward from the initial monument, as far as the line was re- 
established by Mr. Du Bois, every mile corner excepting four was 
identified, and the character of this reestablishment by Mr. Du Bois 
makes this portion of the one hundredth meridian unquestionably 
the best-marked portion of the entire Texas boundary lines from the 
Red River to the Rio Grande as they exist to-day. Of the four mile 
corners which I was unable to find, three were in very sandy soil 
and may be buried in the sand, as was the condition in several in- 
stances in this retracement, where we succeeded in finding the old 
corners by digging. This process, however, adds greatly to the time 
required in making the retracement, and is not always fruitful of 
results. 

A.S developed by Mr. Du Bois, I find also that the old line bears 
rapidly to the east, quite uniformily to the twenty-fourth mile corner — 
the easting to this point amounting to 22.43 chains; from there to the 
thirty-first mile corner the easting is less rapid, but amounts to a 
total easting from the initial monument on the Red River of 27.11 
chains. This easing reduces the distance to the true one hundredth 
meridian, so that, allowing for convergency of meridians, the thirty- 



12 TEXAS, NEW MEXICO, AND OKLAHOMA BOUNDARY LINES. 

first mile corner stands 28.68 chains west of the true one hundredth 
meridian, or only about half so much in error as the initial monu- 
ment. 

From the thirty-first mile corner to the sixty-seventh mile point 
I was retracing the original line as surveyed by Jones and Brown 
in 1857, and to the forty-third mile corner I found and identified 
all excepting three mile corners. Throughout this distance the soil 
is mostly firm, and distinct evidence of the old pits and mounds of 
earth still exists except in a iew sandy places where only the charred 
stake remains to mark the original point. 

The easting from the thirty-first to the forty-third mile corners 
averages about the same as from the twenty-fourth to the thirty- 
first mile corners, and the forty-third mile corner I find to be 20.62 
chains west of the true one hundredth meridian. 

From the forty-third mile corner to the sixty-seventh mile point 
none of the Jones and Brown mile corners could be found, owing, I 
believe, to the loose sandy soil which in many places is loose enough 
to drift. However, on the fifty-third mile I noted a large red sand- 
stone bowlder which I conclude must be the same one as referred to 
at this point by Jones and Brown as being " near the meridian." 
I did find in this distance eleven of the stone closing corners set by 
O. T. Morrill heretofore described; these closing corners agree about 
with the sandstone bowlder in alignment and show that from the 
forty-third mile corner to the closing corner of the third standard 
parallel on the sixty-eighth mile the old line has an additional 
easting of 8.28 chains. 

Between the sixty-seventh and ninetieth mile points I was retra- 
cing the line as reestablished, resurveyed, and closed upon by Hack- 
busch in 1875. and I certainly concur in the view^s expressed by 
Mr. Hackbusch in the remarks with which he has prefaced his 
resurvej'' : " Owing principally to the sandy soil the original corners 
are so far obliterated and indistinct that I find it necessary to 
resurvey and reestablish the line." 

I was unable to find any mile corners or closing corners established 
by Hackl)usch until the seventy-seventh mile corner was reached, 
w'here I found the seventy-seventh milepost in a good state of preser- 
vation ; an oak post 6 x 6 x 24 inches above ground, properly marked 
and setting in tolerably firm soil. The 10 miles from the sixty- 
seventh mile point to the seventy -seventh mile corner are mostly roll- 
ing sand hills, in places loose enough to drift. 

From the closing corner of the third standard parallel on the sixty- 
eighth mile to the seventy-seventh mile corner I find that the old line 
has a westing of 3.23 chains, reducing the total easting from the forty- 
third mile corner to the seventy-seventh mile corner to 5.05 chains; 
I find the seventy-seventh mile corner to be 15.39 chains west of the 
true one hundredth meridian. This westing continues to the Cana- 
dian River, but it was on the Washita River that I found the next 
corners, which were the Hackbusch point 80 miles and 60 chains and 
eighty-first mile corner. The point 80 miles and 60 chains is wit- 
nessed by three bearing trees still standing. In the remaining 9 
miles to the Canadian River I found five mile corners, and on the 
eighty-sixth mile I found the closing corner, the only one I was able 
to find of the closings by Hackbusch. 



TEXAS^ NEW MEXI.CO, AND OKLAHOMA BOUNDARY LINES. 13 

The last point found on the meridian reestablished and resurveved 
by Hackbusch Avas the witness corner 9 chains south of the true point 
for the eighty-ninth mile corner. This point was identified by Hack- 
busch in 1875 and governed his reestablishment and resurvey; this 
monument consists of unmistakable evidence of the old pits and 
mound of earth in firm soil on high bluff south bank of the Canadian 
River. 

I find the witness corner for the eighty-ninth mile corner to be 
18.70 chains west of the true one hundredth meridian. 

The ninetieth mile corner was the initial point for the Darling re- 
survey in 1875 of the one hundredth meridian from this point to the 
south boundary of Kansas. 

I was unable to find the ninetieth mile corner, but Mr. Darling 
states that he found this point bj'- running from the witness corner 
for the eighty-ninth mile corner. At the present time the point for 
the ninetieth mile corner is subject to overflow from the Canadian 
River, and, although the point comes in a grove of elm and cotton- 
wood timber, the place has been burned OA'er and overflowed until the 
ninetieth mile corner has become obliterated. 

Darling's ei^ith mile corner was the first point on his resurvey 
that I was able to find. Most of the country for 8 miles north from 
the Canadian River is made of rolling and drifting sand hills. 
North from the eighth-mile corner to Darling's forty-fourth-mile 
corner I found every corner excepting five. Three of these points 
which I was unable to find came in very sandy soil, and one came in 
r. dry drain, where it might have been washed away during a freshet. 
I also found 22 of the closing corners on the section lines and the 
closing corner of the south boundary of the Cherokee countr}''. 

About a third of the Darling corners were found lying loose on 
the ground, but the mile corners and closing corners agree in showing 
the old line to have a gradual easting from the witness corner for the 
eightj^-ninth-mile corner, south bank of the Canadian, to Darling's 
thirty-fourth-mile corner, the thirty-iourth-mile corner being the 
nearest point on the old line to the true one hundredth meridian. I 
find the thirty-fourth-mile corner to be 8.55 chains west of the true 
one hundredth meridian. 

Xorth from the thirty-fourth-mile corner the old line again shows a 
gradual westing. 

On the forty-third mile I passed the east end of the Cimarron base 
line, and as the point of intersection of the Cimarron base line with 
Darling's one hundredth meridian had never before been determined 
and marked, I established the said point of intersection and marked 
the point for immediate future reference by setting a stake without 
marks, witnessed by a concentric circular pit 6 feet in diameter and a 
mound of earth carefully sodded. 

The point of intersection of the Cimarron base line and Darling's 
one hundredth meridian I find to be N. 0° 41' W., 52.79 chains distant 
from Darling's forty-second-mile corner on the true line between*- the 
forty-second and the forty-third mile corners, and 15.32 chains east 
of the east end of the Cimarron base line. 

I also find said point of intersection of the Cimarron base line 
with Darling's one hundredth meridian to be 11.26 chains west of the 
true one hundredth meridian and 3.69 chains south of the true par- 
allel 36° 30' 0" north latitude. 



lA TEXAS, NEW MEXICO, AND OKLAHOMA -BOUNDARY LINES. 

Darling in 1875 failed to find any of the monuments on the one 
hmidredth meridian established by Clark in 1860, and I was equally 
unsuccessful in 1903 in finding any of Clark's monuuients. 

Clark does not give the measurements along his sur\^eyNfrom one 
monument to the next, but his plat No, 12 (S. Ex. Doc. No. TO) 
shows the topograph}^ on the one hundredth niv'^ridian and the rela- 
tive position of his monuments, but there is nothing v.'liatever to tie 
to in undertaking to locate his monuments on the ground. 

Clark's first monument on the one hundredth meridian south of 
the parallel 36° 30' he states to be on " Pond Creek.-' ilis plat 
shows this about 6^ miles south of the corner monument. Pond 
Creek is evidently the same creek that is called Ivanhoe Creek to-day, 
the main branch being about T miles south of the intersection of the 
one hundredth meridian with the Cimarron base line. Water is so 
very scarce on the one hundredth meridian that it is no wonder tliat 
every evidence of an earth mound would be tramped out by cattle or 
buffalo in the immediate vicinity of watering places, and the soil 
along Ivanhoe Creek is not very firm. 

Clark states that his second monument was established very near 
the north bank of Middle River in sandy soil. ^Middle lliver agrees 
in position with the stream known as Wolf Creek to-daj^, a fine 
stream of running water but so sandy north of Wolf Creek that a 
mound would scarcely remain a season. I found no corjier at all 
north of Wolf Creek until the end of the third mile, but found every 
corner for two miles south of Wolf Creek. 

Clark's third monument was made of stone ajid was established a 
short distance north of Commission Creek. This is the same creek 
as the Conmiission Creek of to-day, but the prairie here is ver}'' 
broken and a search for this corner especially difficult without the 
aid of an}' definite point to run from. I believe rhat this is the only 
Clark monument on the one hundredth meridian that could be in 
existence to-day, but I was unable to find it. 

APPROVAL BY CONGRESS STATUS. 

It does not appear from the records that Congress has ever con- 
sidered the approval or rejection of the survey of the one hundredth 
meridian. It does appear conclusive, however, that the Clark survey 
of the one hundredth meridian was executed with the distinct pros- 

gect in view of adopting it as a recognized marked line bounding the 
tate. of Texas and the Indian Territory: The fact that Messrs. 
Jones and Brown surveyed 109 miles of the one hundredth meridian 
adds inestimably to the value of the line. Clark was instructed by 
the Secretar}' of the Interior to adopt the Jones and Brown survey, 
and he did adopt it and extended it by projection to the parallel 
36° 30' north latitude. The survey by Jones and Brown is well 
marked as compared to the exclusive Clark surveys; and, while 
the errors in longitude on the one hundredth meridian by Jones and 
Brown range from 8 chains to 56 chains, the errors by Clark on the 
one hundred and third meridian range from 165 chains to 307 chains, 
and the act of March 3, 1891 (26 Stat., 971), includes the approval 
of the one hundred and third meridian and does not mention the one 
hundredth meridian. 



TEXAS, NEW MEXICO, AND OKLAHOMA BOUNDARY LINES. 15 

Since the execution of the surveys closing upon the one hundredth 
meridian the United States has patented and disposed of public 
lands on the east, and these titles, therefore, depend upon the existing 
unapproved boundary line. 

The State of Texas has apparently closed its surveys upon the 
same line from the Red River north to the closing corner south 
boundary of the Cherokee country, from which point their closing 
line evidently runs to the east end of the Cimarron base line, and it 
would therefore appear that Texas has constructively approved the 
survey of the one hundredth meridian by Jones and Brown and Clark. 

THE N. E. CORNER OF TEXAS. 
(See S. Ex. Doc. No. 70, 47th Coug., 1st sess.) 

Tl\e Clark corner. — Under his appointment as United States com- 
missioner for the survey of the Texas boundary line John H. Clark, 
in 1860. established the poijit of intersection of the one hundredth 
meridian, as projected by himself, with the parallel of 86° 30' north 
latitude, as determined by latitude observations by himself at a 
point about 3 miles northeast of the point to be determined. At the 
point fixed for the corner Clark erected an earth monument, described 
by himself as follows : 

Tlie iioMJlieast corner monument at the intersection of the parallel 3G° 30' 
and the one-hundredth meridian is a mound of earth and falls in a drain of a 
ridge, but not in a position that is likely to be washed awav. (See Book 1 of 
Survey of the Cimarron Base Line.) 

The Chaneij and Smith corner.— \J\\(\qv contract dated August 26, 
1881, R. O. Chaney and W. W. Smith, United States surveyors, sur- 
veyed m 1881 the Cimarron base line from the one hundred and 
third meridian along the parallel of 36° 30' north latitude, both as 
determmed by themselves. At a point 166 miles 50.91 chains east 
of their initial point they report that they arrived at a point 39.39 
chains north of an old mound, which they suppose is Clark's north- 
east corner of Texas. They return to their line and set a large stone 
monument for the east end of the Cimarron base line, but they 
marked it also with letters appropriate to the northeast corner of 
Texas. Chaney and Smith fail to find Darling's one-hundredth 
meridian. (See vol. 110, Field Notes, and vol. 17, Plats, Oklahoma.) 

The Bennitt survey.— \Jnd&c contract dated June 13, 1890, Lvman 
G. Bennitt, deputy surveyor, surveyed the subdi visional lines in T. 
1 N., R. 28 E., Cimarron meridian, Oklahoma. This survey was 
initiated from the Cimarron base line and closes on the east on Dar- 
ling's one-hundredth meridian. Mr. Bennitt found and identified 
Darling's forty-third mile corner and the mile corners to the north ; 
he also connected the Chaney and Smith monument at the east end 
of the Cimarron base line with Darling's fortv-third mile corner. 
From the Chaney and Smith monument the forty-third mile corner 
bears N. 28° 46' E., 31.37 chains distant. Mr. Bennitt failed to pro- 
ject the Cimarron base line east to an inter.section with Darling's 
one-hundredth meridian. Certainly said point of intersection is the 
proper point for the southeast corner of T. 1 N., R. 28 E, 



16 TEXAS, NEW MEXICO, AND OKLAHOMA BOUNDARY LINES. 

THE STATUS TO-DAY. 

There is positively no evidence to my knowledge of Clark's north- 
east corner of Texas. Darling failed to find it; Chaney and Smith 
thought that they found it. and yet went so far as to mark their stone 
monument at the east end of the Cimarron base line for the northeast 
corner of Texas. I made a vigorous search in the vicinity of where 
Chaney and Smith supposed that they found Clark's northeast corner 
of Texas. That point comes on a knoll and not in the drain of a 
ridge, and the virgin soil is not disturbed except for a fire guard. All 
of the remainder of Clark's latitude work appears to be good, and yet 
the point claimed by Chaney and Smith as Clark's northeast corner 
of Texas is more than a half-mile south of the parallel 36° 30' north 
latitude. Certainly there is no evidence to-day that Chaney and 
Smith found Clark's northeast corner of Texas, neither is there any 
authorization or approval to my kowledge that makes the Chaney 
and Smith stone monument at the east end of the Cimarron base line 
the legal northeast corner of Texas. 

Certainly Darling's forty-third mile corner has no significance as 
the northeast corner of Texas. I think the proper thing for Bcnnitt 
to have done was to project the Cimarron base line east to an inter- 
section with Darling's one hundredth meridian and at that point set 
a closing corner for the Cimarron base line. I establislied said point 
of intersection as a purely reference point, and this point conforms 
with Clsrk's topographical description in so far as it *' comes in the 
drain of a ridge, but not in a position that is likely to be washed 
away." This point of intersection is 11.26 chains west of the true 
one hundredth meridian, and 3.68 chains south of the true parallel 
86° 30' 0'' north latitude, while the Chaney and Smith stone at the 
east end of the Cimarron base line is 26.58 chains west of the true 
one hundredth meridian. There is apparently no legal existing 
monument for the northeast corner of Texas. 

THE PARALLEL 36° 30' NORTH LATITUDE. 

The Clarh survey. — Under the authorization previously noted John 
H. Clark surveyed the parallel 36° 30' 0" north latitude from the 
one hundredth meridian to the one hundred and third meridian. 
This survey Clark executed in 1860, erecting in all 14 monuments on 
the parallel, exclusive of the monuments at the corners of the Texas 
panhandle. Twelve of the monuments consisted of mounds of earth 
and two were built with stone. Clark's notes give a very brief topo- 
graphical description of the location of these points, but the distances 
between them are not noted, and the only record exhibiting their rela- 
tive location is the sketch plats of the survey. Clark's latitude was 
fixed by astronomical observation at several points on his survey of 
the parallel. 

The Chcmcy and Smith survey. — ^Under the authorization previ- 
ously stated Chaney and Smith surveyed the Cimarron base line east 
from the one hundred and third meridian along the parallel 36° 30' 
north latitude to the one hundredth meridian. This survey was exe- 
cuted in 1881, and their position in latitude was fixed by astronomical 
observations by themselves with a meridian telescope, with only a. 



TEXAS;, NEW MEXICO, AND OKLAHOMA BOUNDAEY LINES. 17 

Qonrse level and no micrometer. Chaney and Smith failed to find a 
single one of Clark's corners, except the one as previously considered 
at the northeast corner of Texas. 

THE STATUS TO-DAY. 

In the sundry civil act approved March 3, 1891, it is enacted that 
"the boundary line between said public-land strip and Texas, and 
between Texas and New Mexico, established under the act of June 
fifth, eighteen hundred and fifty-eight, is hereby confirmed." 

The Clark line is therefore the legal boundary line, and the Cimar- 
ron base line is simply the base line for the survey of the public lands 
in Beaver County, Okla. 

I made no retracement of Clark's parallel 36° 30', but I did retrace 
a few miles of the Cimarron base line at each end sufficient to ascer- 
tain that said line can be conclusively identified to-clay. The east 
end of the Cimarron base line is 3.68 chains south of the true parallel 
36° 30' 0" and the initial monument of the Cimarron base line is 
2.31 chains north of said true parallel. 

I am verbally informed by Mr. W. D. Twitchell, State surveyor, 
Texas, that in his survey about sixteen years ago of the county lines 
on the north boundary of the Texas panhandle, embracing about two- 
thirds of the distance from the one hundredth to the one hundred 
and third meridian, that he started from the stone monument mark- 
ing the east end of the Cimarron base line and surveyed west on the 
parallel, and that in the above-mentioned distance his parallel inter- 
sected three of the Clark monuments, numbers or descriptions not 
noted. Mr. Twitchell also states that there exists a considerable 
hiatus between his line and the Cimarron base line, said hiatus being 
of varying width. 

I find an hiatus of about 5 chains between the west end of the 
Cimarron base line and a line of marked stones, which I conclude is 
the north line of Dallam County, Tex. 

THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF THE TEXAS PANHANDLE. 

The Clark corner. — Under the authorization previously noted John 
H. Clark, in 1859, established the northwest corner of the Texas pan- 
handle at the intersection of the one hundred and third meridian and 
the parallel 36° 30' north latitude. The position in longitude was 
fixed by transfer from a point on the thirty-seventh parallel whose 
position in longitude he assumed as correct. The position in latitude 
was fixed by observations with a zenith telescope at a point several 
miles northwest from the point under determination. Clark's 
description of his corner monument is as follows: " It is an earthen 
mound, larger than most of the others. There is in sight of it, besides 
No. 25 (on the one hundred and third meridian). No. 1 on the 
parallel." 

The Major survey. — In 1874 John J. Major, in running south on 
his surve}' of the west boundary of the public-land strip, having 
arrived in the vicinity of Clark's northwest corner of Texas, made a 
close search for Clark's corner. Failing to find it, Major then set his 
terminal monument, described as follows; " Made excavation, depos- 

H. Rep. 1186, 59-1 2 



18 TEXAS, NEW MEXICO, AND OKLAHOMA BOUNDAKY LINES. 

ited bones and glass, erected a pine 7 feet by 7 inches, marked ' Texas, 

N. M., 103° w. l; " 

The Chaney and Smith survey. — In 1881, under authorization pre- 
viously described, Chaney and Smith observed for longitude at T^as 
Animas, Colo., from which they fixed the one hundred and third 
meridian at that point, and ran south on their one hundred and third 
meridian. When in the vicinity of the parallel 36° 30^ they observed 
for latitude, and with data thus obtained fixed the intersection of the 
one hundred and third meridian and the parallel 36° 30' north latitude. 
Their latitude work has been previously described ; their longitude de- 
termination was based on telegraphic exchange of time signals on 
three nights, eye and ear method, personal equation not considered. 
The longitude fixation on the parallel 36° 30' also depends upon the 
projection from Las Animas, Colo., a distance of about 100 miles. 
Chaney and Smith set a large stone monument to mark the astronom- 
ical point that they fixed ; they also made a search, but failed to find 
either the Clark or the Major monument. (See vol. 94, Field Notes, 
and vol. 17, Plats, N. Mex.) 

The Gauldwell survey. — Under contract dated March 1, 1880, 
Andrew B. Cauldwell, deputy survevor, surveyed the subdivisional 
lines of Tps. 25 and 26 N., E. 36 E.,'New Mexico meridian. It has 
since developed that the corner now locally known as the northwest 
corner of Texas is near the center of the SE. \ of sec. 12, T. 26 N., R. 
36 E., yet Cauldwell failed to find said corner now known as the 
northwest corner of Texas. (See vol. 147, Field Notes and Loose 
Plats, N. Mex.) 

The Preston reestablishment. — Under contract dated October 25, 
1899, Levi S. Preston, deputy surveyor, surveyed the subdivisional 
lines of T. 26 N., R. 37 E., New Mexico. In order to properly 
execute said survey, it was necessary to recover and reestablish Clark's 
northwest corner and that portion of Clark's parallel 36° 30' north 
latitude lying west of the Cimarron meridian. This reestablisliment 
by Preston is in accordance with the survey of the north and west 
lines of Dallam County, Tex., by Texas surveyors. Preston started 
from well identified monuments erected by Clark where the one 
hundred and third meridian crosses the Canadian Elver. Thence 
Preston retraced the west line of Oldham, Hartley, and Dallam coun- 
ties, Tex., and found that said survey by the Texas surveyors was on 
a bearing N. 0° 8' W. and N. 0° 8' 30" W. from the Canadian monu- 
ment and one intermediate monument, a distance of about 76^ miles, 
arriving at the northwest corner of Dallam County, Tex., where 
Preston excavated and found the remains of an old post greatly 
decayed. Preston failed to find Major's monument, but he deter- 
mined that the northwest corner of Dallam County, Tex., was within 
150 linl?:s in position for the proper amount east of the Johnson 
monument on the thirty-seventh parallel from which Clark was 
instructed to run east a certain distance to obtain the one hundred 
and third meridian. Preston found no evidence of the Clark survey 
of the parallel 36° 30' other than the resurvey by the Texas surveyors 
of the north line of Dallam County, Tex. Preston found that run- 
ning from the stone monument marking the initial point of the 
Cimarron base and meridian that the northwest corner of Dallam 
county, Tex., lies west 2 miles 14.65 chains, and 5.47 chains south. 



TEXAS^ NEW MEXICO, AND OKLAHOMA BOUNDARY LINES. 19 

Preston concluded that the northwest corner of Dallam County, 
Tex., was the proper point for the northwest corner of Texas, and 
therefore erected a suitable stone monument to perpetuate said point, 
and then closed his survey of fractional T. 26 N., R. 37 E., New 
Mexico meridian, on the north line of Dallam County, Tex., as 
retraced by himself. 

THE STATUS TO-DAY. 

The act of March 3, 1891, confirms Clark's northwest corner of the 
Texas panhandle. 

Whether or not the Texas surveyors recovered and reestablished 
Clark's northwest corner of Texas is uncertain and can probably be 
proven only by their testimony. That they recovered Clark's one 
hundred and third meridian is almost conclusive ; that the north line 
of Dallam County, Tex., is very near the correct latitude is positive. 

I find that Preston's stone monument marking the northw^est corner 
of Texas, set at the northwest corner of Dallam County, Tex., is 
165.57 chains, or 2 miles and 5.57 chains, west of the true one hun- 
dred and third meridian, and 3.18 chains south of the true parallel 
36° 30' 0'' north latitude. 

I also found and identified every corner in this vicinity noted or 
established by Preston, so far as I retraced his work, and I also found 
that the initial monument of the Cimarron base and meridian is 9.39 
chains east of the true one hundred and third meridian and 2.31' 
chains north of the true parallel 36° 30' north latitude. 

THE ONE HUNDRED AND THIRD MERIDIAN. 

The Clark survey. — Under the authorization previoush^ noted, John 
H. Clark surveyed a portion of the one hundred and third meridian, 
as follows : 

The longitude of the one hundred and third meridian at its inter- 
section with the thirty-second parallel was determined in 1859 by 
transfer from the station Frontera, on the Rio Grande. 

Clark's report, p. 298, states that he ran north on the one hundred 
and third meridian from the thirty-second parallel to the thirty-third 
parallel. In this distance Clark erected 3 earth mounds north of 
the southeast corner of New Mexico. The one farthest north was 
erected in latitude 32° 33', as shown on plat No. 5, a difference in 
latitude from the thirty-second parallel corresiDonding to about 38 
miles. Clark then abandoned the projection of the one hundred and 
third meridian from the south. 

The same j'ear Clark again picked up the one hundred and third 
meridian at its intersection with the parallel 36° 30', determination 
previously described, and from that point projected the one hundred 
and third meridian south, and, according to his statement on page 299 
of the report, he projected it to the thirty-fourth parallel. In this dis- 
tance Clark erected 22 monuments, the one farthest south being erected 
in latitude 34° 14', as shown on his plat No. 6. The distance of 
this monument from the parallel 36° 30' is about 156 miles. Of the 
above 22 monuments only 3 were built with stone, viz : Nos. 9, 16, and 
18, the remainder being mounds of earth. 



20 TEXAS, NEW MEXICO, AND OKLAHOMA BOUNDARY LINES. 

The theoretical distance from the thirty-second parallel to the par- 
allel 36° 30' is about 310 miles, and Clark's report states that his pro- 
jection covered the entire distance, excepting from the thirty-third 
to the thirty-fourth parallels, a distance of about 69 miles. His 
plats, however, show that the line was never marked from latitude 
32° 33' to latitude 34° 14', a distance of about 116 miles. (See vols. 
10 and 51, Field Notes, and vol. 17, Plats, N. Mex.) 

Closing on one hundred and third meridian. — Under contract dated 
February 27, 1883, Taylor and Fuss, deputy surveyors, surveyed the 
subdivis'ional lines in Tps. 13 and 14 N., R. 37 E., New Mexico. 
Taylor and Fuss identified Clark's monuments Nos. 15 and 16 on the 
Canadian River, and closed their survey on the projection of the line 
defined by these two monuments. 

I have already referred to the survey by Cauldwell of Tps. 25 and 
26 N., R. 36 E.,"New Mexico, and I will now add that Cauldwell also 
failed to find any of the Clark monuments south of where he should 
have found Clark's northwest corner. 

I have also referred to the identification by Preston, in 1900, of 
Clark's monuments Nos. 15 and 16, which substantiates the identifica- 
tion by Taylor and Fuss of the same monuments, and also corrobo- 
rates the topography in this vicinity, as shown by Clark and Taylor 
and Fuss. Preston reestablished monuments Nos. 15 and 16 with 
stones suitably marked. 

The Texas refracement. — The statement ofW. S. Mabry, Texas 
surveyor, to the Hon. W. C. Walsh, commissioner general land office, 
Austin, Tex., in his rej^ort of surveys on the one hundred and third 
meridian, shows that he found and identified twelve of the Clark 
monuments, viz : Nos. 5, 6,. 7, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 15, 16, 17, and 21. Mr. 
Mabry makes the following statement : " The one on the edge of the 
plain is of stone (No. 9) ; all the others described consist simply 
of a large circular trench, and, though they were made in 1858, are 
yet plain and easily identified.'' The above report is not dated, 
but the retracement was executed just prior to 1885. 

The report of W. D. Twitchell, State surveyor, Texas, to the State 
of Texas, states that in 1892 Mr. TAvitchell found Clark's monument 
No. 1 on the one hundred and third meridian. Mr. Twitchell does 
not describe this monument. 

The 1903 reU-acement. — Mr. Twitchell was associated with Mr. 
Mabry in the latter's retracement of the one hundred and third 
meridian south from the parallel 36° 30', and is therefore acquainted 
with the monuments identified by Mr. Mabry. In December, 1903, 
accompanied by Mr. Twitchell, I visited the following points identi- 
fied by Messrs. Mabry and Twitchell as Clark's monuments : Nos. 1, 
5, 6, 9, 10, 11, and 12. The following notes describe my observations 
at those points : 

No. 1. — This monument is located 1 mile 32.7 chains north of the 
reestablished southeast corner of New Mexico and is the only monu- 
ment ever found on the meridian run north from the southeast cor- 
ner of New Mexico. There is now no evidence of Clark's monument 
at this point, but the topographical surroundings are so nearly in 
exact accordance with Clark's plat No. 4 that I conclude that Mr. 
Twitchell reestablished this point in its location by Clark. The pres- 
ent monument consists of a white gypsum stone 10 by 10 by 8 inches, 



TEXAS, NEW MEXICO, AND OKLAHOMA BOUNDARY LINES. 21 

lying loose on the ground, marked " Mon. No. 1 N." on south face, 
and '' 103 M " on north face. This monument stands 3 miles 67.27 
chains Avest of the true one hundred and third meridian. 

Xo. 5. — Located about 3J- miles south of where the Pecos Valley 
and Northeastern Railway crosses the one hundred and third merid- 
ian. This monument is fenced in and protected from cattle ; it is on 
a slight roll or swell of the prairie, agreeing with Clark's description. 
There is unmistakable evidence of an old circular mound 13^ feet in 
diameter and a circular pit 20 feet in diameter in tolerably firm soil. 
Clark's plat No. 6 shows this monument in latitude 34° 20'. The 
meridian fence at this point bears N. 0° 3' W. and S. 0° 3' E. as deter- 
mined by the solar. Monument No. 5 is the farthest one south of any 
monument ever found on the meridian run south from the northwest 
corner of Texas. 

No. 6. — About 2 miles north of the same railroad; protected the 
same as No. 5, and stands on a flat prairie, agreeing with Clark's 
description. There is unmistakable evidence of the old mound, but 
the pit is not so well defined. The meridian fence deflects here and 
bears N. 0° G' W. and S. 0° 3' E., as determined by the solar. Lati- 
tude by the solar at noon December 18, 34° 25'. 

No. 9. — On the edge of the cap rock on the breaks in the plain; a 
pyramid of limestone partially torn down, pyramid 8 feet on a side, 
points N., S., E., and W., now stands about 2 feet high, except in the 
center, wdiere all of the stones have been removed. The meridian 
fence can be seen a great distance from here, bearing by the solar 
N. 0° r E. and S. 0° 1' W. The breaks in the plain at this point are 
perfectly delineated in Clark's plat No. 7, and to my knowledge this 
is the best identified point established by Clark on the one hundred 
and third meridian. 

No. 10. — Protected by fence, a mound 16 feet in diameter and pit 
20 feet in diameter fairly well defined; stands 1.68 chains south 
of No. 11. 

No. 11. — Protected by fence, stands just north of an old dim trail, 
said to be the Fort Smith and Albuquerque trail ; soil fairly firm here. 
Evidence of this mound is still visible, but the pit is entirely obliter- 
ated. Bearing of meridian fence by solar N. 0° 2' E. ajid S. 0° 2' W. 

No. 12. — About three-fourths of a mile north of No. 11, latitude 
about 35° 8'. This monument is not fenced, but a mound about 14 
feet in diameter and a pit about 20 feet in diameter, both poorly 
defined, bear evidence to an earlier monument at this point. 

Mr. Twitchell and I drove as far north as the Truxillo, but failed 
to find Clark's monument No. 13. INlonument No. 8 has never been 
found, and in view^ of the evidence of Mr. Preston relative to monu- 
ments Nos. 15 and 16, I did not visit those monuments. 

THE STATUS TO-DAT. 

The act of March 3, 1891, confirms the survey of the one hundred 
and third meridian by John H. Clark. Clark left an hiatus of 69 
miles unprojected and an hiatus of 116 miles unmarked, and there 
exists to-day an hiatus from monument No. 1 to monument No. 5 
unidentified, a distance of about 159 miles. All evidence is to the 
effect that monuments Nos. 1, 5, 6, 9, 10, 11. 12, 15, and 16 are identi- 



22 TEXAS, NEW MEXICO, AND OKLAHOMA BOUNDARY LINES. 

fiable to-day, either by evidence on the ground or by parol testimony 
or both. Texas has closed the surveys of that State on all of said 
monuments, and the United States has closed surveys on monuments 
Nos. 15 and 16. Yet the fact remains that the north end of this 
line is in longitude 103° 2' 13.80", and the south end is in longitude 
103° 3' 55.52'', and the projection of meridians through the north 
and south extremities can not meet by about 1 mile 46 chains to 1 
mile 52 chains, depending upon what latitude the distance between 
the two projections would be measured. 

In the event of either the resurvey or the reestablishment of the 
one hundred and third meridian from the thirty-second parallel to 
monument No. 1, and from monument No. 5 to the parallel 36° 30', 
it appears to me that the correct boundary line along the 159 miles 
from monument No. 1 to monument No. 5, which remains unidentified 
and unidentifiable, is on the true one hundred and third meridian as 
it shall hereafter be surveyed and confirmed 

THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF NEAV MEXICO. 

The Clark 'survey. — Under authorization previously noted, John 
H. Clark, in 1859, erected a monument at the intersection of the 
thirty-second jDarallel and the one hundred and third meridian. 
The description of this monument is given on page 302 of his report 
as follows : " This is a mound of very sandy soil ; it has a bottle 
buried in it which contains the latitude and longitude of the point, 
a list of the names of the members of the commission, and the date 
of its erection." Longitude determined by transfer from the station 
Frontera on the Rio Grande, and latitude determined by observations 
with the zenith telescope at a point about 3 miles southeast. 

The Texas reestablisliment. — The report of W. D. Twitchell, State 
surveyor, Texas, to the State of Texas, states that in 1892 Mr. 
Twitchell found Clark's monuments No. 31 on the thirty-second 
parallel and No. 1 on the one hundred and third meridian. Mr. 
Twitchell does not describe in what condition he found the monu- 
ment at the corner or how he identified it, but said report states 
" said point of intersection is marked by a monument 5 varas in 
diameter, with charred wood buried 2 feet east of center." My 
verbal understanding is that Mr. Twitchell reestablished this point 
by running east from No. 31 on the parallel and south from No. 1 
on the meridian. 

The 1903 retracement. — After establishing the true astronomical 
point 103° west longitude 32° north latitude in December, 1903, I 
ran a line to the present marked point for the southeast corner of 
New Mexico. Mr. Twitchell accompanied me. We found some evi- 
dence of his charcoal and a couple of broken pieces of a post or 
railroad tie, but another Texas surveyor had set an iron pipe for 
the corner, and I made the measurements to the pipe. 

This point is in very loose sandy soil and no evidence exists to-day 
of Clark's corner. The iron pipe is located in longitude 103° 3' 
55."52, or a measured distance of 20,285.3 feet west of the true one 
hundred and third meridian; distance equals 3 miles 67.35 chains. 
The latitude of the iron pipe is 31° 59' 58."02, or a measured dis- 
tance of 3.03 chains south of the true thirty-second parallel. 



TEXAS, NEW MEXICO, AND OKLAHOMA BOUNDAKY LINES. 23 



THE STATUS. 



The act of March 3, 1891, confirms Clark's point of intersection 
of the one hundred and third meridian and the tliirty-second parallel. 

The evidence furnished by Mr. Twitchell is to the effect that he 
identified monument No. 31 on the parallel and monument No. 1 on 
the meridian, as witness monuments to the corner. My own knowl- 
edge is to the effect that the iron pipe marked for the southeast corner 
of New Mexico is in the approximate location of Clark's corner, as 
witnessed b}^ the A\Tiite Sand Hills where Clark observed for lati- 
tude. However, the topographical identification of monument No. 
31 on the parallel and monument No. 1 on the meridian is much 
better, and this fact and the fair correctness of its latitude bear 
evidence to the effect that the iron pipe is an authentic resetablishment 
of Clark's corner. 

The latitude of the iron pipe is fairly close; the longitude is per- 
haps the most incorrect of any land line in the United States. 

THE THIRTY-SECOND PARALLEL. 

The Clark survey. — Under the authority of his appointment in 
pursuance of the act of June 5, 1858, John H. Clark, in 1859, initiated 
his survey of the thirty-second parallel at its intersection with the 
Rio Grande and surveyed east a distance of 211 miles to his one hun- 
dred and third meridian, erecting 31 monuments before reaching said 
meridian. Most of these monuments were built of stone or contained 
some stone. 

The Easley and Sanders closings. — Under contract dated February 
21, 1881, Messrs. Easley and Sanders, deputy surveyors, the same year 
surveyed the subdivisional lines of T. 26 S.. R. 3 E,, New Mexico 
meridian. Messrs. Easley and Sanders found and identified Clark's 
monument No. 4 on the first spur of the Franklin Mountains. This 
is a monument of stones 8 feet high, according to the report of Easley 
and Sanders. They ran a line from there west to the Rio Grande, a 
distance of 4 miles 8.40 chains, upon which line thev closed the sur- 
veys in T. 26 S., R. 3 E.; they failed to find the first three Clark 
monuments. (See vol. 45 and 58, Field Notes, and vol. 34, 35, and 38, 
Plats, New Mexico.) 

The Warner and Armstrong reestahlishment. — Under contract 
dated July 13, 1883,. Messrs. Warner and Armstrong, deputy sur- 
veyors, in the execution of their contract No. 193, New Mexico, found 
and identified Clark's monument No. 25 on the bluff near the Avest 
bank of the Pecos, described by Warner and Armstrong as follows: 
A stone marked " T " on south and '' N M 1859 " on north, set in a 
large mound of earth and stone. Running west from monument No. 
25 they found monument No. 22 on the east side of Delaware Creek, 
which monument they describe as follows: A large stone marked 
" T " on south and " N M 1859 " on north face, set in a mound of 
earth and stone. From monument No. 25 they found that No. 22 
bears N 89° 56' W., 6 miles 61.50 chains distant. Running east from 
No. 25 they found monument No. 26, which they describe as follows : 
A pine post 18 inches in diameter, marked *' T " on south and " N M 
1859 " on north, set in a mound of earth. From monument No. 25 



24 TEXAS, NEW MEXICO, AND OKLAHOMA BOUNDARY LINES. 

they found that No. 26 bears S. 89° 5G' E., 8 miles 50 chains distant. 
The survey of Warner and Armstrong- required the closing of sub- 
divisional surveys on 72 miles of the thirty-second parallel, but,-being 
able to find only three of the Clark monuments, they projected the 
parallel as defined by monuments Nos. 22, 25, and 26, and reestab- 
lished it west a distance of 51 miles from monument No. 25 and east 
a distance of 21 miles from monument No. 25, setting stones suitably 
marked at intervals of 1 mile in both directions from monument No. 
25. (Same references and contract as above.) 

The Warner and Armstrong closings. — Having reestablished the 
thirty-second parallel as far as was necessary, Messrs. Warner and 
Armstrong the same year surveyed the subdivisional lines of Tps. 
26 S., R.S. 21 to 32 E., inclusive. New Mexico meridian, and closed 
their survey on the thirty-second parallel, as identified and reestab- 
lished by themselves, setting a stone, suitably marked, and witnessed 
either by pits or a mound of stone, for the closing corners on the 
thirty-second parallel. 

The Texas retracement. — My verbal understanding with Mr. W. D. 
Twitchell, state surveyor, Texas, is that Mr. Twitchell in the execu- 
tion of surveys in Texas, retraced the thirty-second parallel by run- 
ning west from monument No. 31, and that he found no monuments 
until he reached monument No. 26, which he intersected. 

The 1903 retracement. — After establishing a point on the true 
thirty-second parallel near its intersection with the Rio Grande, in 
November, 1903, I ran a line east and found Clark monument No. 4 
on the summit of the first high ridge of the Franklin Mountains. 
This monument is 57 links north of the true thirty-second parallel, 
its latitude being therefore 32° 0' 0.37''. This monument consists of 
a pyramid of stone, base 6 by 6 feet, height 4 feet, mound partially 
down. There are no marks or inscriptions to be found, but the monu- 
ment in every other way answers the description of Clark's fourth 
monument on the thirty-second parallel. This fact, together with 
the correctness of its latitude, make it practically conclusive that this 
is a Clark monument. I failed to find monuments Nos. 1, 2, or 3 on 
the thirty-second parallel. 

After running the line to the iron pipe marking the southeast cor- 
ner of New Mexico I continued west to the reestablished monument 
No. 31, by Mr. Twitchell. This monument is 1 mile 54.78 chains 
west of the monument at the corner and stands 3.11 chains south of 
the true thirtj^-second parallel. This monument noAv consists of a 
galvanized-iron pipe 1^ inches in diameter, 12 inches above ground, 
there being no evidence of the original circular pit or mound of 
earth. However, its topographical position is in perfect symmetry 
with the topographical delineation on Clark's plat No. 4, and this 
fact with the fair correctness of its latitude bears evidence to the 
effect that this is an authentic reestablishment of Clark's monument 
No. 31. 

THE STATUS. 

The act of March 3, 1891, confirms the boundary line on the 
thirty-second parallel as surveyed by Clark. 

Since that survey there have been found Clark's monuments Nos. 
4, 22, 25, 26, and 31, and the United States has closed its public-land 



TEXAS, NEW MEXICO, AND OKLAHOMA BOUNDARY LINES. 25 

surveys on said parallel in one township on the Eio Grande and in 
twelve townships near the Pecos. In the above retracenients and 
closings Clark's monuments Nop. 1, 2, 3, 20, 21, 23, 24, 27, 28, 29, and 
30 should have been found if not obliterated. As to monuments 
Nos. 5 to 19, inclusive, there is no information to the effect that they 
are or are not in existence. 

The latitude on the Rio Grande checks especially close, while the 
latitude at the present marked point for the southeast corner of New 
ISlexico is fairly good. 

THE RIO GRANDE. 

The boundary line between the State of Texas and the Territory 
of New Mexico, from the thirty-second parallel south to the inter- 
national boundary line, is defined in the act of Congress approved 
September 9, 1850 (Vo. IX, Stats., p. 446), as the channel of the Rio 
Bravo del Norte. 

My observation and brief investigations is to the effect that said 
stream has many channels. During the dry season, as in Novem- 
ber, 1903, there is almost no flowing water ; during freshet the stream 
is often several miles wide, and in resuming a normal flow often set- 
tles into a channel a considerable distance from its last previous 
channel. The land along the Rio Grande is valuable for agricultural 
purposes, and the boundary line between Texas and New Mexico 
should be definitely marked. 

Messrs. Easley and Sanders in their survey of T. 26 S., R. 3 E., New 
Mexico, set a post for the intersection of the thirty-second parallel 
and the east boundary of the Refugio grant at a point 4 miles 8.40 
chains west of Clark's monument No. 4. My measurement from 
Clark's monument No. 4 west to the dry bed of the Rio Grande, said 
to be the bed of the stream in 1858 and recognized locally as the boun- 
dary line between Texas and New IMexico, per testimony of C. N. Story, 
justice of the peace, La Tuna, N. Mex., was 3 miles 70.71 chains, and 
the present bed of the Rio Grande is about 2 miles farther west. 

I am unprepared to state what is the legal boundary line between 
Texas and New Mexico from the thirty-second parallel south to the 
international boundary. 

From a careful consideration of the history of the surveys made and 
the action of (Jongress and the public Land Department thereon, it 
appears that Congress has confirmed tlie John H. Clark survey, made 
in 1859-60, locating the northeast corner of the Panhandle of Texas, 
the northwestern corner of the State, and the northwesterly boundary 
so far as surveyed; that the true eastern boundary, being the point of 
intersection of the one hundredth meridian with' the Red River, has 
been fixed and determined by Mr. Arthur D. Kidder, under the act of 
Congress approved January 15, 1901. It also satisfactorily appears 
that many of the monuments located by John H. Clark in 1859 and 
1860 have been obliterated or destroyed and much of the line is 
impossible of identification. 

That controversies now exist over the true location of the boundaries 
between Texas and Oklahoma, and between Texas and New Mexico, 
and especially over the unsurveyed portion of the western boundary. 



26 TEXAS NEW MEXICO, AND OKLAHOMA BOUNDARY LINES. 

The pending bill, H. R, 443, provides for the appointment of a com- 
missioner who shall be appointed by the President, who, in conjunc- 
tion with the commissioner to be appointed b}^ Texas for the same 
purpose, shall run and mark the boundary between the Territories of 
Oklahoma and New Mexico and the State of Texas, beginning- at the 
point where the one hundredth degree of longitude west from Green- 
wich ci'osses the Red River, and running thence north to the point 
where the said one hundredth degree of longitude intersects the par- 
allel of 36° 30' north latitude, as determined by John H. Clark in 
1859; thence west along said parallel, as marked by said Clark, to the 
point where it intersects the one hundred and third degree of longitude 
west from Greenwich, as determined by said Clark, and thence south 
with the said one hundred and third degree of longitude to the thirtj- 
second parallel of north latitude, and thence west with the thirt}'^- 
second degree of north latitude, as determined by said Clark, to the 
Rio Grande River, 

The second section provides that the monuments established under 
act of Congress approved January 15, 1901, by Arthur D. Kidder, as 
the point of intersection of the true one hundredth meridian with Red 
River shall be accepted as correct and shall be the beginning point of 
said survey on said river, and such other landmarks and corners shall 
be established as ma}" ])e agreed upon by the commissioners. 

That that part of the line on the thirt3'-second degree of north lati- 
tude and on the one hundred and third degree of longitude and the 
northern boundary of the Panhandle, so far as the same and each of 
them were surveyed by Clark in 1859-60 and can now be identified, 
shall be adopted as the true boundary line, and that when any portion 
of the line can not be identified it shall be determined by running a 
straight line from the opposite monuments that are identified, and 
• when such straight lines are so run and marked they shall form the 
true boundary. 

An act similar to the pending bill was passed by the legislature of 
Texas in 1903, authorizing the governor of Texas to appoint a com- 
missioner to act in conjunction with a commissioner to be appointed 
by the United States. The Texas act recognizes the eastern boundary 
monument as fixed and determined by Mr. Arthur I). Kidder in 1902, 
and also recognizes and adopts the Clark survey made in 1859, as con- 
stituting the true boundary lines of the State as far as established by 
him. Suitable provisions should undoubtedly be made for the present 
determination of the boundary lines in controversy, and inasmuch as 
the Clark survey so far as it located the western boundary and estab- 
lished the northwest and northeast corners of the Panhandle and 
located the northern boundary thereof has been approved and con- 
firmed by Congress, such boundary lines should obtain and govern so 
far as they can be ascertained and identified. The eastern boundary 
of the Panhandle should be determined from the monument set by 
Kidder as constituting the true point of intersection of the one hun- 
dredth meridian with the Red River, and running thence to the point 
located by John H. Clark in 1859 as the northeast corner of the Pan- 
handle. 

It should be stated that the location of the one hundred and third 
degree of longitude as determined by Clark may not be the true merid- 
ian astronomically located, but, as before stated, so far as it was located 



TEXAS, NEW MEXICO, AND OKLAHOMA BOUNDARY LINES. 27 

and surveyed by him it has been approved by the United States and 
accepted by the State of Texas; hence, in the judgment of your com- 
mittee, so far as the Clark survey along that meridian as located by 
him can be reestablislied it must constitute the boundary line. 

In view of the controversy existing- as to the location of that merid- 
ian and the unsurveyed portion thereof, the committee are of opinion 
that the proposition of the State of Texas to fix that portion by con- 
necting- the two points of the Clark survey by a straight line ought 
to be acted upon, and have accordingly recommended the bill without 
amendment in that respect. 



LIBRARY OF CONGRESS 





'y^- 



-^^ 



